CONCLUSION
This new framework for IR presents several advantages. First, it incorporates the different dimensions of IR in a comprehensive unit while keeping them separate from one another to avoid confounding.
Second, it adds a new dimension specifying what competencies are required to carry out the activities of IR instead of relying on a detailed inventory of the activities themselves. This higher level of abstraction of the competencies dimension is more synthetic, more comprehensive, and more resilient to environmental changes making some activities come and go. Third, the framework clarifies how the competencies can exist at different levels of development in accordance with the concept of knowledge management.
This provides specificity and measurability. The framework specifies that exercising competencies in more sectors and for more functions also represents further development, because each addition entails a more comprehensive expertise. While sectoral development can be treated as additive because the competencies are evaluated for each, it is currently unclear how to treat the multiplicity of functions in a quantitative manner because there is overlap of competencies and sectoral content across functions. This is the subject of future work.
